Gerner v VictoriaCitation:[2020] HCA 48Before:Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Keane, Gordon, Edelman JJDate:10 Dec 2020Case Number:M104/2020Read more
There is no general freedom of movement within a State implied by the Constitution. The directions under the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 (Vic) restricting movement within Victoria are not invalid on the basis asserted by the plaintiffs.
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Plaintiffs; Defendant: Defendant
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 10 December 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Law / Judgment
- Outcome
- Plaintiffs' claims dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Implied Constitutional Rights, Freedom of Movement, COVID 19 Restrictions, Public Health Orders
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff
Defendant
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Law / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 (Vic) directions restricting movement are invalid as infringing an implied freedom of movement in the Constitution
- 2 Whether the Constitution implies a freedom of movement within a State
- 3 Whether the freedom of movement is protected by the implied freedom of political communication
Ratio Decidendi
There is no general freedom of movement within a State implied by the Constitution. The directions under the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 (Vic) restricting movement within Victoria are not invalid on the basis asserted by the plaintiffs.
Court Disposition
Plaintiffs' claims dismissed
Orders
- Plaintiffs' claims are dismissed
- No declaration of invalidity is made in respect of the directions or the statutory provisions
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment